100 years of income tax

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,455
7
81
Which part?

That people only want to pay for things they agree with. If you're a republican, do you contribute to the democratic coffers? I'm not exactly understanding why people should be forced to support something they don't agree with.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
In other words, libertarians fail at basic American law.

Basic American law is the federal government regulates interstate trade.

If something stays within the border of a state the federal government has no business regulating it.
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
That people only want to pay for things they agree with. If you're a republican, do you contribute to the democratic coffers? I'm not exactly understanding why people should be forced to support something they don't agree with.

Well, it's only "forced" due to the petulance of the people involved.

Military? EPA? SEC? FCC? FDA?

There are always going to be things that someone doesn't support, but taxes are collected for the goals selected by those elected.

Me? I'd like clean water for everyone, but I've seen people say that they'd never want their tax money going towards that goal.

But we don't get to pick what our money is spent on. We pick the people who pick what our money is spent on. Elections... that's how it works in a representative state.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Ultimately it's a balance that has to be constantly judged and re-judged. But unless you two are living in the middle of the desert, the odds are that your ability to make a transaction have been enormously influenced by the works of greater society (seen as "government"):

- He bought the jeans (or the fabric of the jeans?) from a store travelling there by society-built and maintained roads

- The store set up shop nearby because it was provided assurance that heat, water and electricity would be extended to its location

- If one of you went to public school, your ability to understand the English language to transact with is partially a result of a society-built and staffed organization

- Transactions both at the store and between the two of you are relatively well assured to be peaceful because the law protects both of you (both in a fraud case and from a violence perspective); I don't believe that people are innately evil and will murder each other over jeans, but this is in play to some extent

And so on. Only the most isolated individuals are fully free from the interference (good and bad) of society (again, seen as "government"). It is reasonable to ask that some amount be paid back to continue to maintain those services.

I think that as we find ourselves in more dense environments with other humans (big cities), the need for privacy-encroaching laws grows. You probably shouldn't have people using their backyards as gun ranges in a suburban area with tiny yards, for example. Or allow people to barbecue in their condos. I don't like telling people what they can't do on their own land, but like fees for fire and police departments, there are things that you just have to agree to paying for the sake of everyone.

The problem is that of all those things you listed, most are or can be provided locally. Other than the interstate and rail systems which carry raw goods, electricity, water, local roads, law enforcement, fire protection, education, etc. are provided by local government. But everything keeps bubbling up higher and higher to the federal government, and out of the control of the citizenry. Our federal government is massive, and is increasingly growing completely unaccountable to the average American.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Well, it's only "forced" due to the petulance of the people involved.

Military? EPA? SEC? FCC? FDA?

There are always going to be things that someone doesn't support, but taxes are collected for the goals selected by those elected.

Me? I'd like clean water for everyone, but I've seen people say that they'd never want their tax money going towards that goal.

But we don't get to pick what our money is spent on. We pick the people who pick what our money is spent on. Elections... that's how it works in a representative state.

So no private wells allowed? And we should shut down local water management and move to a federally controlled water bureaucracy?
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
why am i taxed on my labor? We weren't taxed on labor for 140 years after we became a nation and yet somehow we had a government that survived. what has the government become that so much revenue is required to sustain it?


Answer: Wars.

War on Drugs. War on Terrorism. War on Poverty. War on ...... Wars and more wars.

More money is spent by our government on "wars" than anything else. That is what got the income tax going in the first place by the federal government. Wars. Ever wonder how the term fear-mongering came about?

People say, well we need to pay so much for defense because of all the possible trouble the rest of the world may bring our way. Really? Why would the rest of the world come after us and how would they have the means to do so if we are truly that technologically advanced in warfare over them? Answer, we stir the shit and arm them. Hence fear mongering. The government can point to something that is a "threat" and continue to get people to buy into their bullshit. Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq anyone? All one has to do is realize how much our government pissed off so many middle eastern countries in the past to realize the problem of terrorism we have faced in the recent decades was all a result of those actions done by our government before hand. Whether it was calculated to have that result or not I don't know. But I'm guessing more than likely. Fear is a great motivator.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
The first great lesson to learn about taxation is that taxation is simply robbery. No more and no less. For what is "robbery"? Robbery is the taking of a man's property by the use of violence or the threat thereof, and therefore without the victim's consent. And yet what else is taxation?
Those who claim that taxation is, in some mystical sense, really "voluntary" should then have no qualms about getting rid of that vital feature of the law which says that failure to pay one's taxes is criminal and subject to appropriate penalty. But does anyone seriously believe that if the payment of taxation were really made voluntary, say in the sense of contributing to the American Cancer Society, that any appreciable revenue would find itself into the coffers of government? Then why don't we try it as an experiment for a few years, or a few decades, and find out?
But if taxation is robbery, then it follows as the night the day that those people who engage in, and live off, robbery are a gang of thieves. Hence the government is a group of thieves, and deserves, morally, aesthetically, and philosophically, to be treated exactly as a group of less socially respectable ruffians would be treated. - Murray Rothbard

:thumbsup:
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
I guess some of us feel that forced integration often fuels racism and bigotry more than letting people change at their own pace.

Maybe in some cases. But it's clear the alternative of doing nothing didn't prove at all fruitful the prior, well, 100+ years.

It's one thing to say you can't own another person as a slave. It's entirely another thing that not only can you not own them, but you have to serve them in your restaurant. The first might create resentment against the system, but the second creates resentment against the individual.

It may indeed create some resentment, but I would say that forced integration and forcing the Civil Rights Act through (if you call either of them "forcing", which is reasonable) worked out well, as very few people openly believe that they should be able to deny people entrance to their private businesses based on skin color, or believe that integration has fueled further racism (it clearly hasn't, though racism still exists).
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
True, but is participation in these groups and communities not voluntary? I don't oppose the existance of a governmental entity, in fact i think it's vital that we have one. The criteria that should be asked 'how does this impact individual liberty?'.
If I want to buy a pair of jeans from a neighbor that I see fit to wear and he sees fit to sell me, why should the government have a say in that transaction, or apply a tax to it? If I choose to smoke in my own home or have five girlfriends, of what business is it of the government? If i want to have a gun for self protection. . . etc. so long as i'm not violating the right of another to be secure in their person or property then hands off!

The precept of individual liberty is fantastic and needs to be guarded, but the notion that what you do in your own home is your own business is only true sometimes. You can't build a tall structure that blocks the sun from entering your neighbor's yard just because you're building it on your private property. While you technically own your property from the center of the earth through your foundation and up to the top of the sky....you really don't, because whether you realize it or not you're affecting other people and institutions when you build tall structures on your property that block people's enjoyment of their's, or launch your rocket-propelled kite 30,000 feet into the air hitting a jetliner, or attempt to block an oil company's right to extract the migratory minerals below your foundation.

These are very common situations, they're old and they're practically ingrained into the fabric of the country. These areas, while "private" property, are restricted in their use for very good reasons that have been adjudicated for hundreds of years. They didn't appear out of thin air and you aren't the first, or last, to have been offended by them. But when you think about it for a good long while, a lot of the restrictions make plenty of sense.

why am i taxed on my labor? We weren't taxed on labor for 140 years after we became a nation and yet somehow we had a government that survived. what has the government become that so much revenue is required to sustain it?

Huh? We weren't taxed on our labor until the early 20th century? Say what?
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Well, it's only "forced" due to the petulance of the people involved.

You dumbasses. Those who think they are free = petulant. Fuck you.

Military? EPA? SEC? FCC? FDA?

And fuck them too. Take what I earn for what I do not condone is theft. You won't understand and never will.

There are always going to be things that someone doesn't support, but taxes are collected for the goals selected by those elected.

I didn't elect anyone nor agree for them to be my master. Not only that but not everyone fits into the two party system and even less agree 100% with what their "representative" chooses for them. Mindless dipshits like yourself are the reason we're so fucked. You sit in your chair claiming representation but then opine that the dastardly deeds of war you don't support (example). Well if you don't support it dumbass how are you represented? Fucking idiots the lot of you.

Me? I'd like clean water for everyone, but I've seen people say that they'd never want their tax money going towards that goal
.

Newsflash mindless moron you don't need "government" for people to want clean water. smh

But we don't get to pick what our money is spent on.

Are you that fucking stupid to think its not slavery if you don't get to choose what you spend your money on? If you don't get to choose who's fucking money is it? Statist shit stinking up the place.

We pick the people who pick what our money is spent on. Elections... that's how it works in a representative state.

Ah yeah no. There is no true representation only the mask of it. You wouldn't dare to proclaim that the person you chose to "represent you" is your responsibility. The massive delusions you dipshits conjure up is most entertaining and sad at the same time.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
You dumbasses. Those who think they are free = petulant. Fuck you.



And fuck them too. Take what I earn for what I do not condone is theft. You won't understand and never will.



I didn't elect anyone nor agree for them to be my master. Not only that but not everyone fits into the two party system and even less agree 100% with what their "representative" chooses for them. Mindless dipshits like yourself are the reason we're so fucked. You sit in your chair claiming representation but then opine that the dastardly deeds of war you don't support (example). Well if you don't support it dumbass how are you represented? Fucking idiots the lot of you.

.

Newsflash mindless moron you don't need "government" for people to want clean water. smh



Are you that fucking stupid to think its not slavery if you don't get to choose what you spend your money on? If you don't get to choose who's fucking money is it? Statist shit stinking up the place.



Ah yeah no. There is no true representation only the mask of it. You wouldn't dare to proclaim that the person you chose to "represent you" is your responsibility. The massive delusions you dipshits conjure up is most entertaining and sad at the same time.

lol. It's always funny to see frightened simpletons scared of the complexity of life and their reps in Congress. As if a world where war doesn't exist is a goal you could vote away with or without gov't. Tool.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
lol. It's always funny to see frightened simpletons scared of the complexity of life and their reps in Congress.

lol. its always funny to see indoctrinated morons unable to think past their authority worship. Such simple things such as self ownership escapes them. blind bats forcing their blindness on everyone else. Those who are afraid are the ones forcing payments for war machines. You wouldn't get that though. That's too much for you to think about.

As if a world where war doesn't exist

As if it isn't created, instituted and perpetuated by mass murderers who masqueraded as "representatives". Idiot.

is a goal you could vote away with or without gov't. Tool.

The lot of you mindless drones are the reason any of these "wars" existed. More than 2/3rds of you otherwise good people can't think for yourself but instead fight for your master as if its you you're fighting for. The level of ignorance is staggering. Fuck being a moral mind its off to war like a robot that you are.
 
Last edited:

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
Murray Rothbard was a well known racist, and not very many particularly important people with influence ever took him seriously. FYI.

LBJ was a vehement racist but Democrats still love him.

-- President Lyndon Johnson using the "N" word. --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1rIDmDWSms

Then again how does assertion of racism disprove Murray's views on taxation as being theft again? Oh it doesn't but it sure does serve as a nice form of character assassination to ignore topics at hand.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
LBJ was a vehement racist but Democrats still love him.

-- President Lyndon Johnson using the "N" word. --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1rIDmDWSms

LBJ was *not* a vehement racist. His use of that word in private conversation was casual, as was common among many whites at the time, particularly southern whites.

He worked hard to pass the civil rights & voting rights acts, signed them into law. A vehement racist wouldn't have done that, at all.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
The problem is that of all those things you listed, most are or can be provided locally. Other than the interstate and rail systems which carry raw goods, electricity, water, local roads, law enforcement, fire protection, education, etc. are provided by local government. But everything keeps bubbling up higher and higher to the federal government, and out of the control of the citizenry. Our federal government is massive, and is increasingly growing completely unaccountable to the average American.

Tell it to the Red State recipients of Federal Welfare.

http://stonesoup.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/federal-funding-received-by-state-per-dollar-sent/

~40% of the state budget of Mississippi comes from Federal funds.Other deep red states are similar. Not that I begrudge them the money- I begrudge them their bullshit about the ebil fedruhl gubmint. Left to support themselves, they'd be screwed.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,275
965
136
Tell it to the Red State recipients of Federal Welfare.

http://stonesoup.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/federal-funding-received-by-state-per-dollar-sent/

~40% of the state budget of Mississippi comes from Federal funds.Other deep red states are similar. Not that I begrudge them the money- I begrudge them their bullshit about the ebil fedruhl gubmint. Left to support themselves, they'd be screwed.

Do regular folks in Kansas need the farm bill, which only benefits the massive corporate-farms? Do the regular folks in the border states need the border patrol money, when the drug war violence is solely caused by the fascistic policies of the federal government? Do small towns in rural America need to conform to expensive big city regulations on every issue under the sun?

Another example is the federal government extorting the states, for example, enforce the expensive drug laws or we will withhold the highway bill money. A 20 man SWAT team in Buttfuck Nebraska costs a lot more per person than the same goon squad in NYC.

Sparsely populated states absorb more federal money because of federal regulation and diktat, not because they asked for the money. They passed the laws, after all, everyone must obey the Moloch.
 
Last edited:

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
~40% of the state budget of Mississippi comes from Federal funds.Other deep red states are similar. Not that I begrudge them the money- I begrudge them their bullshit about the ebil fedruhl gubmint. Left to support themselves, they'd be screwed.
Most of that money goes to people who vote for Democrats.
 

nextJin

Golden Member
Apr 16, 2009
1,848
0
0
LBJ was *not* a vehement racist. His use of that word in private conversation was casual, as was common among many whites at the time, particularly southern whites.

He worked hard to pass the civil rights & voting rights acts, signed them into law. A vehement racist wouldn't have done that, at all.

Wait so he was not racist yet Ron Paul was a grand wizard?

Damn, that's tense.
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,455
7
81
Most of that money goes to people who vote for Democrats.

According to the link, they spend more than half of the money they recieve on medicaid.. which is, as I understand it, a federal program? Take that out and they pretty much break even.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
Do regular folks in Kansas need the farm bill, which only benefits the massive corporate-farms? Do the regular folks in the border states need the border patrol money, when the drug war violence is solely caused by the fascistic policies of the federal government? Do small towns in rural America need to conform to expensive big city regulations on every issue under the sun?

Another example is the federal government extorting the states, for example, enforce the expensive drug laws or we will withhold the highway bill money. A 20 man SWAT team in Buttfuck Nebraska costs a lot more per person than the same goon squad in NYC.

Sparsely populated states absorb more federal money because of federal regulation and diktat, not because they asked for the money. They passed the laws, after all, everyone must obey the Moloch.

Delusional rant of Denial.

There is no linkage of highway funds & drug enforcement laws, for example. Red States, in general, have more repressive drug laws-

http://www.alternet.org/story/150935/the_5_worst_states_to_get_busted_with_pot

http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/09/half-ounce-of-pot-gets-louisiana-man-twenty-years-in-prison/

Contrast that with Hippy-dippy Ebil Libruhl Colorado & Washington, where possession is legal, and where retail sales will begin Jan 1, 2014. Highway funds are unaffected.

You will, of course, believe what you want to believe, regardless of the evidence. It's all about so-called "Values". It's a basic feature of Teahadists & Libertopians.